Studies have shown that kids may be exposed to as many as 1,000 television ads a year from fast food chains. Each child may see thousands more food ads on smartphones, tablets, and computers. On top of that, food chains and food makers are frequent sponsors of youth activities such as minor sports.

But retailers, food makers, and advertisers are pushing back. They say there is no evidence exposure to food advertising is linked to obesity rates and, in any event, Statistics Canada data shows that, as the prevalence of screens — smartphones, tablets and the like — spread through Canada’s child population from 2004 to 2015, obesity rates actually dropped.

Moreover, that advertising supports jobs among food makers, retailers, and creators of children’s television content. Corus, the parent company of Global News, is among the companies registered to lobby against S-228.

“To solve the problem, you have to attack it from all sides and I think for sure a decrease in the promotion of unhealthy food and beverages is the low-hanging fruit,” Raine said in an interview from Kamloops, B.C. “It’s easy to do. Some people don’t like it but certainly, it can be done.”

In testimony earlier this year, nutrition and health experts provided the Senate’s Social Affairs, Science and Technology committee with reams of statistics documenting the rapid rise and spread in advertising aimed at children on social media platforms, on the Web and on legacy platforms such as television.

“Mandatory food and beverage marketing restrictions are an effective strategy to improve our children’s food intake, obesity levels and health,” Monique Potvin Kent, an assistant professor at the medical school at the University of Ottawa, told the committee on June 7.

But minutes after making that declaration, when Senator Carolyn Stewart Olsen asked her or other nutrition experts testifying that day to provide some evidence connecting advertising aimed at kids to obesity levels, Kent conceded there was none.

“Research-wise, it would be impossible to tie those two things together. There are too many intervening variables to be able to craft that type of study. From a researcher’s perspective, that study is impossible,” Kent said. “To tie a health outcome that is over here to a policy that is so far away from the person, there are too many other variables that could also have an impact. It’s not to say that the policy might not have an impact; it’s just that it’s impossible to measure.”

WATCH: Children’s eating habits are formed by watching their fathers

Not only that, but both Statistics Canada and University of Manitoba researchers have found that, even with the explosion of advertising aimed at kids in the last decade or so, obesity rates in Canada have been falling.

In 2004, 34.3 per cent of Canadian kids were found by StatsCan to be either overweight or obese. But by 2015, that number had dropped to 30.9 per cent.

A 2016 study by University of Manitoba researchers, published in the Canadian Medical Journal, found a similar trend that obesity rates among children declined between 2004 and 2013 from 30.7 per cent to 27 per cent.

Separately, Health Canada has spent the summer canvassing for reaction on two options to restrict food ads aimed at kids. First, it is considering banning all ads where the food product at issue contains no more than between five to 15 per cent the recommended daily maximums for fat, sugar or sodium.

The second option would kill all food ads aimed at kids from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. and 9 p.m. on weekdays and almost all day on weekends.

Opponents of Raine’s bill and of Health Canada’s proposals are counting on the Trudeau government to make good on its frequent boast that it prefers “evidence-based policy” to kill S-228 if it reaches the House of Commons.

WATCH: Canadian pediatricians warn to limit screen time for children

“This is going to affect not only jobs in the food industry side, it’s going to affect jobs in the cultural creation side,” said Ron Lund, CEO of the Association of Canadian Advertisers.

Some broadcasters of children’s programming also run advertising promoting healthier food choices in addition to those from other food makers and food chains. As an example, Corus, which includes Teletoon and Disney Channel among its stable of specialty channels, has a program called “Kids Food Nation” which consists of a website supported by broadcast ads.

Moreover, the ad industry argues that many major food companies adhere to a voluntary set of guidelines under the Canadian Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative in which they agree to limit or eliminate the advertising of some products depending on the audience likely to view those ads.

Opponents of the ad restrictions say the objective — improving the health of Canadian kids — is an excellent one but argue restrictions on advertising or marketing of products to kids is unlikely to help achieve that objective.

“Our worry is the government is moving forward with an approach that doesn’t at all think about the fact that this multi-dimensional issue requires a multi-dimensional solution,” said Satinder Chera, president of the Canadian Convenience Stores Association.

WATCH: New guidelines for children’s screen time

Raine’s bill is at second reading in the Senate and, if it clears third reading there, it will have to go to the House of Commons for consideration by that chamber. There, Raine’s bill will only see success if the governing Liberals use their majority to make it law.

So far, Raine has had some encouraging words from government MPs.

“This is a non-partisan issue. This is an issue about family and about children’s health.”